Biological inoculant effective against aphanomyces
A bacterial inoculant is disclosed for controlling root rot in peas caused by Aphanomyces fungus. The inoculum is obtained from general bacterial strains including strains of Pseudomonas cepacia, Pseudomonas fluorescens, Corynebacterium flaccumfaciens, and two other Bacillus strains of uncertain taxonomy.
Latest Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation Patents:
- GENETICALLY MODIFIED GENES AND CELLS, AND METHODS OF USING SAME FOR SILENCING VIRUS GENE EXPRESSION
- Tandem electrodialysis cell systems based on the use of redox couples
- Vector for gene silencing and replacement and methods of use thereof
- Systems and methods for undermedia repellency
- Biomarkers for early diagnosis and differentiation of mycobacterial infection
The present invention is generally directed to inoculants for plants, and particularly directed to a biological inoculant effective in controlling root rot of plants, such as peas, caused by the fungus Aphanomyces euteiches.
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTIONFarm crops are continually plagued by a variety of pests which can stunt or damage crop growth or even completely destroy the crop. Some of the pests are in the form of weeds which grow similarly to the desired plant and compete for the nutrients provided by soil and water. Other pests are in the form of pathogens such as fungi and bacteria which are found in association with many plants.
One of the more serious problems associated with fungal pathogens in plants is root rot. For example, pea root rot caused by the fungus Aphanomyces euteiches is a serious problem in pea-growing areas, particularly in Wisconsin and other Great Lake states. The Aphanomyces fungus infects not only peas, but also snap beans and alfalfa, accounting for 10 to 15% losses in yield. In extreme cases, some fields, where the fungus population has been built up over the period of several years, have become essentially useless for these crops.
Despite efforts to develop fungicides and commercially acceptable pea cultivars with resistance to this pathogen, there is presently no commercially available product capable of controlling Aphanomyces. Currently, the best way to avoid the disease loss is to avoid planting susceptible crops in soils with a high population of the Aphanomyces fungus. Unfortunately, the fungus can survive for many years in field soil and a long rotational time to other crops is not practical. As a result, there is a need to find an alternative disease control strategy to eliminate root rot caused by Aphanomyces and possibly other fungi.
There is increasing interest in the use of living organisms to control such diseases. Microscopic organisms are present in soil in populations of approximately 1 billion per cubic inch of soil. Some of the microorganisms cause disease and some are beneficial. The beneficial microorganisms are of major interest. It has long been known in agriculture that certain of these microbial inoculants can be used to facilitate the growth of certain plant species or to assist the plants in suppressing particular pathogenic organisms. For example, it has been a common practice to inoculate soybeans and other legumes at planting with bacterial cultures of the genus Rhizobium so that nitrogen-fixing nodules will form as a result of the plant-bacterium symbiosis.
Reference is now made to U.S. Pat. No. 4,588,584 to Lumsden, et al. which discloses a particular species of Pseudomonas cepacia which is effective in controlling Pythium diseases of cucumber and peas. There is also much literature on the use of Pseudomonas fluorescens as a biocontrol agent against various plant diseases, but not against the fungus Aphanomyces. The term "biocontrol agent", as used herein, refers to a living organism which controls diseases.
SUMMARY OF THE INVENTIONIt is therefore an object of the invention to provide a biocontrol agent which is effective in biologically controlling pea root rot in the field.
It is also an object of the present invention to provide a biocontrol agent which is effective in reducing plant mortality in peas and other vegetable and field crops.
It is further an object of the present invention to provide a process for increasing the crop yield in Aphanomyces-infested soils.
These and other objects are met by the present invention which is directed to a process for controlling Aphanomyces fungal diseases of plants by inoculating the plants with an effective amount of an essentially biologically pure culture of a bacterial strain selected from the group consisting of strains AMMA, AMMD, PRA25, 5A, AM, CRK419, and mixtures thereof to control Aphanomyces.
The present invention is also directed to a process for increasing seed germination, decreasing plant mortality and increasing yield of a pea plant by inoculating the pea plant with a growth promotional effective amount of an essentially biologically pure culture of a bacterial strain selected from the group consisting of Pseudomonas cepacia and Pseudomonas fluorescens.
The present invention is also directed to a biological inoculant for controlling Aphanomyces fungal diseases on plants comprising an essentially biologically pure culture of a bacteria selected from the group consisting of strains AMMA, AMMD, PRAZ5, 5A AM, CRK419, and mixtures thereof.
The present invention is also directed to an agriculturally useful composition comprising a pea seed inoculated with an inoculant of either Pseudomonas cepacia or Pseudomonas fluorescens.
The inoculum which controls Aphanomyces on field crops, such as peas, is also disclosed in this invention. As used herein, the term "inoculum" means a biological control agent which is introduced onto a host substance or into soil. The inoculum comprises an essentially biologically pure culture of the bacteria mentioned in the previous paragraphs.
The bacterial strains and their process of use, disclosed in the present invention, represent a significant advance in controlling Aphanomyces. Because the bacterial strains are a biologically pure culture of a natural biological organism, massive quantities of the inoculum can be applied to the Aphanomyces infested area with little danger of environmental contamination. In view of public concern for ground water contamination and aerial pollution from pesticides, the form of control disclosed in the present invention is an attractive and economic alternative to chemical pesticides and other methods of control.
Other objects, advantages and features of the present invention will become apparent from the following specification when taken in conjunction with the accompanying drawing.
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGSFIG. 1 is a graph illustrating the results of the mass spectrometric analysis of the fatty acid profile of Pseudomonas cepacia AMMA;
FIG. 2 is a graph illustrating the results of the mass spectrometric analysis of the fatty acid profile of Pseudomonas cepacia AMMD;
FIG. 3 is a graph illustrating the results of the mass spectrometric analysis of the fatty acid profile of Pseudomonas fluorescens PRA25: and
FIG. 4 illustrates a schematic view of a plant bioassay useful for observing biocontrol activity.
FIG. 5 is a graph illustrating the results of the mass spectrometric analysis of the fatty acid profile of Corynebacterium flaccumfaciens 5A.
FIG. 6 is a graph illustrating the results of the mass spectrometric analysis of the fatty acid profile of bacterial strain AM.
FIG. 7 is a graph illustrating the results of the mass spectrometric analysis of the fatty acid profile of bacterial strain CRK419.
DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTIONThe present invention is directed to improving the growth and survival rate of field crops infested with the fungus Aphanomyces, and particularly the strain Aphanomyces euteiches, by inoculating the field crop with a biologically pure bacterial inoculant of the selected strains of the species Pseudomonas cepaci, Pseudomonas fluorescens, Corynebacterium flaccumfaciens, and a strain of Bacillus. The particular strains of the bacteria involved in the present invention were discovered by the inventor and are identified by the following nomenclature, as presently known:
Pseudomonas cepacia AMMA
Pseudomonas cepacia AMMD
Pseudomonas fluorescens PRA25
Corynebacterium flaccumfaciens 5A
Bacillus/Corynebacterium sp AM
Bacillus CRK419
The above-referenced bacterial strains were initially isolated from over 200 strains of bacteria associated with pea plants in the field. The bacterial strains Pseudomonas fluorescens PRA25 and strains 5A and AM were initially isolated from the rhizosphere of healthy appearing pea plants grown in soil at the University of Wisconsin - Arlington Experimental Farms Pea Root Rot Nursery, a naturally infested pea root rot area. The bacterial strains Pseudomonas cepacia AMMA and Pseudomonas cepacia AMMD were initially isolated from the rhizosphere of healthy appearing pea plants grown in containment in soil known to be infested with the Aphanomyces fungus from the University of Wisconsin-Arlington Experimental Farm. The strain of uncertain taxonomy (probably Bacillus) designated CRK419 was isolated from a corn field in which peas were previously cultivated near Fredonia, Ozaukee County, Wis.
The targeted bacterial strains were collected in the following manner. The root system from the pea plants was removed and agitated to shake off the excess soil. The hypocotyl and epicotyl segments of the roots were placed in distilled water, sonicated, and thereafter isolated in a plate dilution process, known to the art, in a TSAC (tryptic soy agar cyclohexamide) medium. Cyclohexamide is an anti-fungal agent. Colonies were thereafter selected and screened according to methods known to the art. The bacterial strains were thereafter stored in a DMSO solution at approximately -80.degree. C. until required for use.
It has been found that the bacterial strains may be mass produced in culture with relative ease. The strains are cultured in a suitable culture medium such as a commercially available nutrient broth yeast (NBY) extract. As the bacterial strains grow and multiply, essentially biologically pure cultures of the strains are formed which may be collected. The term "biologically pure culture" is used herein to refer to cultures of bacteria that have essentially no concentration of other strains of bacteria.
The bacteria strains were then screened for biocontrol activity in soil which has been naturally infested or artificially infested with the Aphanomyces fungus in order to determine which bacterial strains are effective biocontrol agents.
The selected biocontrol agents were coated onto the plant seeds, e.g., the pea seeds, prior to planting. A preferred method for coating the seeds is to combine the bacterial strain with a biologically non-interfering liquid carrier for application onto the seeds. A carrier shall be deemed "biologically non-interfering" if it does not prevent the bacterial strains from growing, and if it does not affect Aphanomyces in the absence of the bacteria. The nutrient medium in which the bacteria were cultured has been found to be a satisfactory medium. A suitable fungicide, i.e., captan, may also be coated on the seeds. The cultures survive air-drying after seed coating. The preferred carrier is a water-based liquid, preferably sterile distilled water.
Although coating the seed with the bacterial strain is preferred, other processes which provide a convenient means for distributing the bacterial strain to the Aphanomyces fungi fall within the scope and spirit of the invention. For example, the bacterial strain may be directly applied to the soil prior to planting the seeds.
Whether the inoculant is coated actually on the plant seed or inserted into the furrows into which the seeds are planted, the inoculant is preferably diluted with a suitable carrier or extender so as to make the inoculant easier to handle and to provide a sufficient quantity of material so as to be capable of easy human handling. Examples of suitable carriers include water, granular minerals, such as vermiculite, soils or peat.
To enable others to obtain a culture of these strains, samples have been deposited with the American Type Culture Collection (ATCC), being identified by the accession number and date of deposit as follows:
______________________________________
ATCC Date of
Bacterial Strain Accession No.
Deposit
______________________________________
Pseudomonas cepacia AMMA
52796 7/22/88
Pseudomonas cepacia AMMD
53795 7/22/88
Pseudomonas fluorescens PRA25
53794 7/22/88
Corynebacterium flaccumfaciens 5A
53934 7/26/89
Bacillus/Corynebacterium AM
53933 7/26/89
Bacillus CRK419 53935 7/26/89
______________________________________
To further identify the bacterial strains, a fatty acid profile for each rhizosphere culture was determined by mass spectrometric analysis. The term "rhizosphere", as used herein, refers to the zone of soil subject to the influence of the plant roots.
With reference to FIG. 1, the results of the tests to determine the fatty acid profile for Pseudomonas cepacia AMMA are presented below in Table 1:
TABLE 1
__________________________________________________________________________
RT Area Ar/Ht
Respon
ECL Name % Comment 1 Comment
__________________________________________________________________________
2
1.613
40785000
0.081
-- 7.051
SOLVENT PEAK <min rt
4.447
1548 0.036
1.036
12.000
12:0 0.98 ECL deviates Ref 0.000
6.828
4415 0.038
0.969
14.000
14:0 2.63 ECL deviates Ref -0.001
9.108
8547 0.042
0.944
15.493
Sum In
Feature 3 4.95 ECL deviates 14:003
30H/16:1 ISC
9.636
27640 0.042
0.941
15.819
16:1 CIS 9 15.97
ECL deviates 0.002
9.928
25281 0.044
0.940
15.999
16:0 14.58
ECL deviates -0.001
Ref -0.002
11.437
9844 0.047
0.936
16.890
17:0 CYCLO 5.66 ECL deviates Ref 0.000
11.714
1646 0.047
0.936
17.052
16:1 20H 0.95 ECL deviates 0.005
12.034
1188 0.047
0.936
17.236
16:0 20H 0.68 ECL deviates 0.001
12.534
9443 0.048
0.937
17.524
16:0 30H 5.43 ECL deviates 0.004
12.937
733 0.047
-- 17.757 --
13.053
73016 0.048
0.937
17.824
Sum In
Feature 7 42.01
ECL deviates -0.001
18:1 TRANS
9/t6/c11
13.356
1307 0.046
0.938
17.998
18:0 0.75 ECL deviates -0.002
Ref -0.002
14.143
904 0.066
-- 18.452
-- --
14.922
5361 0.050
0.943
18.901
19:0 CYCLO
C11-12 3.10 ECL deviates Ref 0.001
15.251
3969 0.055
0.945
19.091
18:1 20H 2.30 ECL deviates 0.003
******
8547 -- -- -- SUMMED
FEATURE 3 4.95 12:0 ALDE ? unknown 10.9
******
-- -- -- -- -- 16:1 ISO I/14:0
14:0 30H/
16:1 ISO I
******
73016 -- -- -- SUMMED
FEATURE 7 42.01
18:1 CIS 11/t 9/t
18:1 TRANS
9/t6/c11
******
-- -- -- -- -- 18:1 TRANS 6/t9/c11
__________________________________________________________________________
Solvent Ar
Total Area
Named Area
% NAmed Total Amnt
Nbr Ref
ECL Deviation
Ref ECL
__________________________________________________________________________
Shift
40785000
174842 173205 99.06 162924 6 0.002 0.001
__________________________________________________________________________
TSBA [Rev 2.0] Pseudomonas 0.440
P. cepacia 0.440
P. c. cepacia GC subgroup B
0.440
__________________________________________________________________________
Comparison with TSBA [Rev 2.0 ]: Pseudomonas-cepacia-cepacia GC subgroup
B Distance: 3.8
051015202530354045505560657075
................
12:0-*--...............
11:0 ISO.30H.*-...............
13:1 AT 12-13*-...............
14:0-+X---..............
16:1 CIS 9..----------*------ ---..........
16:1 C*...............
16.0...-X----*-----..........
17:0 CYCLO.----X+-----.............
17:0*-...............
16:1 20H-*-...............
16:0 20H-*-...............
16:0 30H.-+X-..............
18:0-*-...............
19:0 CYCLO-X+-------... ..........
C11-12
18:1 20H--*--..............
SUMMED.-*-..............
FEATURE 3
SUMMED......-----*---------X.......
FEATURE 7
__________________________________________________________________________
With reference to FIG. 2, the results of the fatty acid profile for Pseudomonas cepacia AMMD are presented below in Table 2:
TABLE 2
__________________________________________________________________________
RT Area Ar/Ht
Respon
ECL Name % Comment 1 Comment
__________________________________________________________________________
1.613
40748000
0.081
-- 7.052
SOLVENT PEAK
-- <min rt
4.446
1993 0.031
1.036
12.000
12:0 1.00
ECL deviates Ref -0.001
6.826
5489 0.038
0.969
14.000
14:0 2.59
ECL deviates -0.000
Ref -0.002
9.107
9988 0.042
0.944
15.493
Sum In
Feature 3 4.59
ECL deviates 14:003
30H/16:1 ISO
9.634
30599 0.043
0.941
15.818
16:1 CIS 9 14.02
ECL deviates 0.001
9.928
36362 0.044
0.940
16.000
16:0 16.63
ECL deviates Ref -0.002
10.083
1560 0.070
-- 16.092 --
11.436
16563 0.048
0.936
16.890
17:0 CYCLO 7.55
ECL deviates Ref 0.000
11.714
1747 0.046
0.936
17.052
16:1 20H 0.80
ECL deviates 0.005
12.034
1387 0.049
0.936
17.237
16:0 20H 0.63
ECL deviates 0.002
12.532
11342 0.048
0.937
17.524
16:0 30H 5.17
ECL deviates 0.004
12.934
1066 0.044
-- 17.756 --
13.051
86323 0.047
0.937
17.823
Sum In
Feature 7 39.38
ECL deviates 18:1 CIS
11/t 9/t6
13.354
1722 0.047
0.938
17.998
18:0 0.79
ECL deviates -0.002
Ref -0.003
14.143
1445 0.067
-- 18.453 --
14.489
1051 0.057
-- 18.652 --
15.921
9636 0.048
0.943
18.901
19:0 CYCLO
C11-12 4.42
ECL deviates Ref 0.000
15.249
5288 0.057
0.945
19.091
18:1 20H 2.43
ECL deviates 0.003
17.137
1003 0.043
-- 20.191 -- >max rt
******
9988 -- -- -- SUMMED
FEATURE 3 4.59
12:0 ALDE ? unknown 10.9
******
-- -- -- -- -- 16:1 ISO I/14:0
14:0 30H/
16:1 ISO I
******
86323 -- -- -- SUMMED
FEATURE 7 39.38
18:1 CIS 11/t 9/t
18:1 TRANS
9/t6/c11
******
-- -- -- -- -- 18:1 TRANS 6/t9/c11
__________________________________________________________________________
Solvent Ar
Total Area
Named Area
% Named Total Amnt
Nbr Ref
ECL Deviation
Ref ECL
__________________________________________________________________________
Shift
40748000
223561 218439 97.71 205479 6 0.002 0.002
__________________________________________________________________________
TSBA [Rev 2.0] Pseudomonas 0.591
P. cepacia 0.591
P. c. cepacia GC subgroup B
0.591
__________________________________________________________________________
Comparison with TSBA [Rev 2.0]: Pseudomonas-cepacia-cepacia GC subgroup
B-Distance: 3.0
051015202530354045505560657075
................
12:0-*--...............
11:0 ISO 30H.*-...............
13:1 AT 12-13*-...............
14:0-+X---...... ........
16:1 CIS 9..--------*-+---------..........
16:1 C*...............
16.0...-------X-+-----..........
17:0 CYCLO.------+X----.............
17:0*-...............
16:1 20H-*-...............
16:0 20H-*-...............
16:0 30H.-+X-..............
18:0- *-...............
19:0 CYCLO---*------.............
C11-12
18:1 20H--*--..............
SUMMED.-*-..............
FEATURE 3
SUMMED......-----+-----X-.......
FEATURE 7
__________________________________________________________________________
With reference to FIG. 3, the results of the tests to determine the fatty acid profile for Psuedomonas fluorescens PRA25 are presented below in Table 3:
TABLE 3
__________________________________________________________________________
RT Area Ar/Ht
Respon
ECL Name % Comment 1 Comment
__________________________________________________________________________
2
1.613
40050000
0.080
-- 7.047
SOLVENT PEAK
-- <min rt
3.958
4169 0.030
1.069
11.429
10:0 30H 5.14
ECL deviates 0.006
4.444
1045 0.039
1.041
12.000
12:0 1.26
ECL deviates Ref -0.002
5.759
5852 0.036
0.996
13.181
12:0 20H 6.72
ECL deviates 0.003
6.122
4845 0.037
0.988
13.460
12:0 30H 5.52
ECL deviates 0.005
9.632
30810 0.043
0.942
16.818
16:1 CIS 9 33.48
ECL deviates 0.001
9.925
29005 0.043
0.941
15.999
16:0 31.46
ECL deviates -0.001
Ref -0.002
11.434
1943 0.045
0.935
16.889
17:0 CYCLO 2.10
ECL deviates Ref 0.001
13.046
13300 0.045
0.934
17.821
Sum In
Feature 7 14.32
ECL deviates -0.001
18:1 CIS
11/t 9/t6
17.779
528 0.026
-- 20.569 -- >max rt
******
13300 -- -- -- SUMMED
FEATURE 7 14.32
18:1 CIS 11/t 9/t
18:1 TRANS
9/t6/c11
******
-- -- -- -- -- 18:1 TRANS 6/t9/c11
__________________________________________________________________________
Solvent Ar
Total Area
Named Area
% Named Total Amnt
Nbr Ref
ECL Deviation
Ref ECL
__________________________________________________________________________
Shift
40050000
90969 90969 100.00 86707 3 0.003 0.002
__________________________________________________________________________
TSBA [Rev 2.0] Pseudomonas 0.661 (P. fluorescens D)
P. chlororaphis 0.661 (P. fluorescens D)
P. aureofaciens 0.515 (P. fluorescens E)
P. fluorescens 0.422
P. f. A. 0.422
P. f. G. 0.320
P. f. C. 0.265
__________________________________________________________________________
Comparison with TSBA [Rev 2.0]: Pseudomonas-chlororaphis (P. fluorescens
D)-Distance: 2
051015202530354045505560657075
................
10.0 30H.-+X-..............
12:0X+ -...............
12:0 20H.-+-X..............
12.1 30H*-...............
12:0.30H.+-X..............
14:0*-...............
16:1 CIS 9.......-X-+----........
16:0......---+X---.........
17:0.CYCLO--*--..............
18:0*-...............
SUMMED...---X+----...... ......
FEATURE 7
__________________________________________________________________________
FIG. 5 illustrates the fatty acid profile, determined by mass spectrometer for strain 5A. The exact taxonomical classification of strain 5A is not certain, although it is in the Corynebacterium or Bacillus groups, and it is currently believed that the organism is properly classified as Corynebacterium flaccumfaciens. It is a gram positive, non-motile rod and on NBY forms smooth bright yellow colonies, with margins entire. The bacterial are aerobic, catalese positive, oxidase negative and grow on TTC agar. To further firmly fix the species classification, it would be necessary to perform a thin layer chromatographic analysis of the whole organism methanolysates. The results of the fatty acid analysis are recapitulated in the following Table 4:
TABLE 4
__________________________________________________________________________
RT Area Ar/Ht
Respon
ECL Name % Comment 1 Comment
__________________________________________________________________________
2
1.613
40717000
0.081
-- 7.051
SOLVENT PEAK <min rt
6.328
4354 0.036
0.979
13.618
14:0 ISO 1.23 ECL deviates -0.000
Ref -0.003
7.747
34292 0.040
0.956
14.621
15:0 ISO 9.51 ECL deviates -0.000
Ref -0.002
7.884
198650
0.040
0.955
14.713
15:0 ANIEISO
54.98
ECL deviates Ref 0.000
8.310
1069 0.043
0.950
15.000
15:0 0.29 ECL deviates -0.000
Ref -0.002
9.321
68683 0.042
0.943
15.625
16:0 ISO 18.77
ECL deviates -0.001
Ref -0.003
9.927
11080 0.043
0.940
16.000
16:0 3.02 ECL deviates -0.000
Ref -0.002
10.993
5560 0.045
0.937
16.629
17:0 ISO 1.51 ECL deviates Ref -0.002
11.150
39366 0.045
0.937
16.722
17:0 ANIEISO
10.69
ECL deviates Ref -0.003
16.434
1161 0.365
-- 19.784
-- -- >max ar/ht
17.908
2771 0.261
-- 20.644
-- -- >max rt
Solvent Ar
Total Area
Named Area
% Named Total Amnt
Nbr Ref
ECL Deviation
Ref ECL
__________________________________________________________________________
Shift
40717000
364215 363054 99.68 345020 8 0.001 0.002
TSBA [Rev 2.0] Bacillus 0.161
B. polymyxa 0.161
__________________________________________________________________________
Comparison with TSBA [Rev 2.0]: Bacillus-polymyxa Distance: 5.670
051015202530354045505560657075
................
11:0 ISO30H.*-...............
14:0 ISO- X+-...............
14:0X-+ -...............
15:0 ISO.-----+--X-.............
15:0 ANIEISO..........-------X----+------------.
15:0*-...............
16:0 ISO.-------+------X......... ...
16:1 AX+--...............
16:0. X - - - +- - - -...............
17:0 ISO.-X+--..............
17:0 ANIEISO.---+--X.............
__________________________________________________________________________
The strain AM is also not unequivocally classified. It appears to belong to the Bacillus polymyxa/circulans/macerans group. It may also, however, be Corynebacterium as well. With reference to FIG. 6, the results of the fatty acid profile for strain AM are presented below in Table 5:
3 TABLE 5
RT Area Ar/Ht Respon ECL Name % Comment 1 Comment
1.613 40608000 0.081 -- 7.052 SOLVENT PEAK <min rt 1.811 815 0.020
-- 7.485 -- -- <min rt 6.021 620 0.037 0.985 13.381 14:0 ISO E 0.15 ECL
deviates -0.007 6.329 3574 0.036 0.979 13.618 14:0 ISO 0.84 ECL deviates
-0.000 Ref -0.002 7.749 41315 0.040 0.956 14.621 15:0 ISO 9.53 ECL
deviates -0.000 Ref -0.001 7.886 217290 0.041 0.955 14.713 15:0 ANIEISO
50.05 ECL deviates 0.002 Ref 0.001 8.311 968 0.042 0.950 14.999 15:0
0.22 ECL deviates -0.001 Ref -0.001 9.325 82543 0.042 0.943 15.626 16:0
ISO 18.78 ECL deviates 0.000 Ref -0.001 9.928 11351 0.044 0.940 15.999
16:0 2.57 ECL deviates -0.001 Ref -0.002 10.995 12426 0.044 0.937
16.629 17:0 ISO 2.81 ECL deviates 0.000 Ref -0.001 11.153 66566 0.044
0.937 16.722 17:0 ANIEISO 15.04 ECL deviates 0.000 Ref -0.001 14.004
805 0.050 -- 18.372 -- -- 14.494
808 0.053 -- 18.655 -- -- Solvent Ar Total Area Named
Area % Named Total Amnt Nbr Ref ECL Deviation Ref ECL Shift
40608000 438266 436653 99.63 414520 8 0.002 0.001
TSBA [Rev 2.0] Bacillus 0.021 B. circulans 0.021 B. polymyxa
0.014 Comparison with TSBA [Rev 2.0]: Bacillus-circulans Distance:
8.257 051015202530354045505560657075 ................ 13:0 ISO*--.........
.
14:1 ISO*-.... ........... 14:0 ISO-X---+------------------...........
14.0X---+----.............. 15:0 ISO-------+-X-------------...........
15:0 ANIEISO......-------------------+- -X---------------.. 15:0*-........
.
16:0 ISO E*--............... 16:0 ISO--------+---------X-...........
16:1 AX--+-----.............. 16:0---X--------+--- -----------------......
.
17:0 ISO-+-X-............... 17:0 ANIEISO.-----+--------X............
The strain CRK419 is a Bacillus strain, perhaps of Bacillus firmus. Referring now to FIG. 7, the results of the fatty acid profile of the Bacillus strain CRK419 is presented referring also to the following Table 6:
3 TABLE 6
RT Area Ar/Ht Respon ECL Name % Comment 1 Comment
1.613 40859000 0.081 -- 7.054 SOLVENT PEAK <min rt 6.326 1464 0.037
0.979 13.616 14:0 ISO 0.38 ECL deviates -0.002 Ref -0.005 6.829 5020
0.038 0.969 14.002 14:0 1.28 ECL deviates 0.002 Ref 0.000 7.749 33670
0.039 0.956 14.621 15:0 ISO 8.47 ECL deviates -0.000 Ref -0.001 7.884
47762 0.040 0.955 14.711 15:0 ANIEISO 12.00 ECL deviates 0.000 Ref
0.000 8.314 920 0.047 0.950 15.001 15:0 0.23 ECL deviates 0.001 Ref
0.001 9.326 1334 0.037 0.943 15.626 16:0 ISO 0.33 ECL deviates -0.000
Ref 0.000 9.381 6042 0.045 0.943 15.659 unknown 15.665 1.50 ECL
deviates -0.006 9.539 4827 0.046 0.942 15.757 16:1 A 1.20 ECL deviates
0.000 9.636 4396 0.044 0.941 15.817 16:1 CIS 9 1.09 ECL deviates 0.000
9.695 4484 0.042 0.941 156.853 Sum in feature 4 1.11 ECL deviates
-0.003 16:1 TRANS 9/15i20H 9.783 958 0.042 0.941 15.908 16:1 C
0.24 ECL deviates -0.000 9.933 108370 0.043 0.094 16.001 16:0 26.80 ECL
deviates 0.001 Ref 0.001 10.484 2818 0.046 0.938 16.385 17:1 ISO E
0.70 ECL deviates -0.002 10.745 1397 0.054 0.937 16.480 Sum in
feature 5 0.34 ECL deviates 0.004 17:1 ISO I/ANTEI B 10.996
11597 0.046 0.937 16.628 17:0 ISO 2.86 ECL deviates -0.001 Ref -0.001
11.154 10474 0.044 0.937 16.721 17:0 ANIEISO 2.58 ECL deviates -0.001
Ref -0.000 11.274 1078 0.058 0.936 16.792 17:1 B 0.27 ECL deviates
0.000 11.438 833 0.053 0.936 16.889 17:0 CYCLO 0.21 ECL deviates 0.001
Ref 0.001 12.866 2291 0.054 0.937 17.716 Sum in feature 6 0.56 ECL
deviates -0.004 18:2 CIS 9,12/18:0a 12.961 26913 0.046 0.937
17.771 18:1 CIS 9 6.64 ECL deviates 0.002 13.055 98867 0.048 0.937
17.825 Sum in feature 7 24.39 ECL deviates 0.000 18:1 TRANS
9/t6/c11 13.358 5115 0.049 0.938 18.000 18:0 1.26 ECL deviates 0.000
Ref -0.001 14.379 3110 0.053 -- 18.591 -- -- 14.570 3110 0.045 --
18.701 -- -- 14.765 4691 0.047 0.943 18.814 19:1 TRANS 7 1.16 ECL
deviates -0.009 14.863 17717 0.048 0.943 18.871 Sum in feature 9
4.40 ECL deviates 0.004 19:0 CYCLO C9-10/un 16.278 6987 0.047
-- 19.689 -- -- 17.787 4189 0.049 -- 20.569 -- -- >max rt 17.953 10626
0.047 -- 20.665 -- -- >max rt 18.156 2298 0.052 -- 20.784 -- -- >max rt
19.384 1248 0.069 -- 21.499 -- -- >max rt 19.590 12895 0.049 -- 21.619
-- -- >max rt ****** 4484 -- -- -- SUMMED FEATURE 4 1.11 15:0 ISO
20H/16:1t9 16:1 TRANS 9/15i20H ****** 1397 -- -- -- SUMMED
FEATURE 5 0.34 17:1 ISO I/ANTEI B 17:1 ANTEISO B/i ****** 2291
-- -- -- SUMMED FEATURE 6 0.56 18:2 CIS 9,12/18:0a 18:0
ANTEISO/18:2 ****** 98867 -- -- -- SUMMED FEATURE 7 24.39 18:1 CIS
11/t 9/t 6 18:1 TRANS 9/t6/c11 ****** -- -- -- -- -- -- 18:1
TRANS 6/t9/c11 ****** 17717 -- -- -- SUMMED FEATURE 9 4.40 un
18.846/18.858 un 18.858/ .846/19c ****** -- -- -- -- -- -- 19:0
CYCLO C9-10/un
Solvent Ar Total Area Named Area % Named Total Amnt Nbr Ref ECL
Deviation Ref ECL Shift
40859000 416245 403038 96.83 379910 11 0.003 0.002
TSBA [Rev 2.0] *NO MATCH* Comparison with TSBA [Rev 2.0]: Bacillus-firm
us Distance: 73.724 051015202530354045505560657075 ................
14:0 ISOX--+------............. 14.0-X-+-----.............. 15.1
ANTEISOX+----............. . A 15:0 ISO-------X-----------------+---------
-
.. 15:0 ANIEISO----------X------+-------------------------....... -
-
15:0X+ 16:1 ISO EX----+----------- ----........... 16:1 ISO.H*-...........
.
16:0 ISOX--------+------------------------......... unknown 15.665+X.....
.
16:1 A-X--+----------............ 16:1 CIS 9+X............... 16:1 .
.
CX+-- 16:0--------+----------------X---------........ 17:1 ISO.E-X+---....
.
17:1 ANIEISO.*-............ ... A 17:0 ISO--+X-.............. 17:0
ANIEISO---X+-----............. 17:1 B*-............... 17:0 CYCLO*-.......
.
18:1 CIS 9+-.X.............. 18:0-*- -............... 19:1 TRANS .
.
7+X.... SUMMED-*----.............. FEATURE 4 SUMMEDX--+-------............
.
FEATURE 5 SUMMED+X............... FEATURE 6 SUMMED+-... .X...........
FEATURE 7 SUMMED+-X............... FEATURE 9
The following non-limitative examples are designed to illustrate the present invention:
EXAMPLES Example 1Example 1 was conducted to isolate and determine particular bacterial strains which are effective biocontrol agents for the Aphanomyces fungus. Approximately 200 bacterial strains were isolated from pea roots grown in Wisconsin soils infested with Aphanomyces. Each isolate was grown in a nutrient broth (NBY) and coated onto a captan-treated pea seed (Perfection 8221). The term "captan" refers to a fungicide having the chemical name N-(Trichloromethylthio) tetrahydrophthalimide. The coated seeds were air-dried prior to planting.
The coated seeds and the control seeds were then planted in 60 cc. cone-shaped containers, as illustrated in FIG. 4, containing either pasteurized soil or naturally infested (with Aphanomyces) field soil. Unless otherwise defined, the control in each of the experiments was a captan-treated pea seed. The pasteurized soil was inoculated with 2.times.10.sup.4 Aphanomyces zoospores six days after planting. The plants were then grown under greenhouse conditions for approximately three weeks, after which the disease symptoms and shoot dry weights were measured.
The following bacterial strains, listed in Table 7, were identified as the best strains in terms of improvement in shoot dry weights and decreased disease symptoms over control conditions:
TABLE 7
______________________________________
Bacterial % Shoot Wt. Increase
Strain Compared to Control
______________________________________
CRK449 19.5
5A 19.9
CRK424 20.0
AMMD 20.2
PRA44 20.2
CRK419 20.6
PRA25 21.2
PRA42 22.6
PRA48 23.0
CRK468 25.1
CRK478 27.7
PRA15 45.2
AMMA 52.7
______________________________________
The bacterial strains which showed the greatest promise in reducing pea root rot and disease severity, as well as increasing shoot dry weight, were then tested under field conditions (Examples 2 and 3).
EXAMPLE 36Example 2 was designed to test the twelve bacterial strains, which showed the greatest promise from Example 1, for biocontrol activity. The bacterial strains were cultured and coated onto pea seeds according to the methods described in Example 1. The seeds were then planted in a plot of 17 foot rows of 100 seeds each, each replicated 5 times in a randomized block design. The plants were allowed to grow for one season (8 weeks). Plant mortality was evaluated weekly and the plant yield was determined using the dry weight of the pea plants measured. It is to be noted that the disease was so prevalent in this experiment that no pea pods formed. The results of Example 2 are presented below in Table 8.
TABLE 8
______________________________________
Bacterial Mean Shoot %
Strain Dry Wt., g Difference**
______________________________________
control 61 --
PRA48 36 -41
PRA44 44 -28
CRK424 47 -23
CRK168 61 +1
CRK468 66 +8
PRA42 68 +12
PRA15 69 +22
CRK419 79 +31
PRA25 85 +41
5A 92* +52
AMMD 94* +55
AMMA 103* +70
______________________________________
*P less than .05 Dunnett Test
**Between the treatments (Bacterial Strain) and the control.
EXAMPLE 3
This example, which is similar to Example 2, comprised field trials conducted in locations representing a range of Aphanomyces densities. Example 3 was designed to test five bacterial strains plus a control. The methods and materials were conducted in a manner similar to Example 2. The plant mortality due to Aphanomyces was evaluated weekly. Plant yield was determined using the dry weight of the peas at dry seed stage. The results of this experiment are presented below in Table 9.
TABLE 9
______________________________________
Mean Dry % Yield
Bacterial Strain
Wt. Peas, g
Difference
______________________________________
control 175 --
AM 158 -10
5A 189 8
PRA25 210 12
CRK419 215 23
AMMD 282 61
______________________________________
From Table 3, it can be seen that the bacterial strain AMMD increased the average seed yield by 61%, compared to the non-coated controls.
EXAMPLE 4Like Example 3, Example 4 was designed to test strains of bacterial in the field. Six bacterial strains plus a control were tested under conditions similar to Example 2. Unlike Example 2, the yield here was determined using the fresh weight of peas. The results of Example 4 can be found below in Table 10:
TABLE 10
______________________________________
Mean Fresh % Yield
Bacterial Strain
Wt. Peas, g
Difference
______________________________________
control 105 --
UW85 119 13
CRK419 155 41
PRA25 166 58
5A 177 69
AMMD 188 79
AM 209* 99
______________________________________
*P less than .05 Dunnett Test.
Several bacterial strains increased pea yield by 13-99%. Pseudomonas cepacia strain AMMD increased yield by 79%, and Pseudomonas fluorescens strain PRA 25 increased yield by 58% compared to the control treatment. It is to be noted that none of the bacterial strains increased the pea yield in fields with less than 1 Aphanomyces propagule per gram of soil.
The next experiments, Examples 5-13, were designed to provide information as to how the bacterial strains work. Although the mechanism of biocontrol by the bacteria is unknown, it has been suggested from tests conducted in petri dishes that the biocontrol bacteria produce a substance which limits the growth of the fungus. This substance may act as an antibiotic in reducing the growth of the fungus in the soil.
EXAMPLE 5Example 5 was conducted to test the effects of the bacterial cultures on the Aphanomyces zoospores. Prior to conducting the test, it was determined that the growth medium, a 1% solution of NBY broth, does not affect the motility of Aphanomyces zoospores. The bacterial strains Pseudomonas cepacia AMMD and Bacillus cereus (UW85) were grown in the NBY growth medium under conditions explained previously with respect to culturing the bacterial strains. The bacterial strains were then diluted to 1% of their original solution and added to a petri dish containing zoospores of the Aphanomyces fungus. The Aphanomyces zoospores were tested for motility after 30 minutes exposure to the bacterial strains, and cyst germination was quantified after 6 hour exposure to the bacterial strains. Cyst germination is a test of the viability of the fungus.
The motility rating scale is as follows:
0=no motility
1=a few motile cells
2=roughly half
3=most cells motile
4=full motility as seen at initial release in check treatment.
After 30 minutes exposure to the bacteria and the controls (lake water and 1% NBY broth), the effects on zoospore motility are presented on Table 11:
TABLE 11
______________________________________
Bacterial Strain
Motility
______________________________________
lake water* 3.0
NBY* 3.0
Bacillus cereus 1.6
AMMD 0.2
______________________________________
*Control
Table 12 below illustrates the effect of exposure of the bacterial strains and controls to cyst development in the Aphanomyces fungus after 6 hours:
TABLE 12
______________________________________
Bacterial Strain
% Germlings
______________________________________
NBY* 58.6
AMMD 22.6
lake water* 17.4
Bacillus cereus
13.6
______________________________________
*Control
Replicates of these procedures also demonstrated that AMMA also eliminates zoospore motility in 10 minutes and delays cyst germination.
EXAMPLE 6Example 6 was conducted to compare the effects of certain bacterial strains with a control treatment in zoospore motility of Aphanomyces fungus. The experimental procedure described in Example 5 was followed. The effects on zoospore motility was observed 10 minutes after the bacterial strains (or control) was added to the Aphanomyces treatment. The results are illustrated below in Table 13.
TABLE 13
______________________________________
Treatment* Motility
______________________________________
broth alone 2.0
AM 2.0
PRA25 1.9
CRK419 1.9
BC 1.8
5A 1.4
AMMA 0.0
AMMD 0.0
______________________________________
*Values are means of 5 replicates.
EXAMPLE 7
Example 7 was conducted to compare the effects of different bacterial strains on mycelial growth, zoospore motility and cyst germination of Aphanomyces. The experimental procedure of Example 5 was followed with respect to Example 7. The results of Example 7 are illustrated below in Table 14.
TABLE 14
______________________________________
Bacterial
Mycelial Zoospore Cyst
Strain Growth Motility Germination
______________________________________
AMMA +++* +++ +++
AMMD +++ +++ +++
PRA25 +++ - -
AM +++ - -
CRK419 -** - -
5A - + -
UW85 +*** - -
______________________________________
*cessation of activity
**no change in activity
***slight decrease in activity
EXAMPLE 8
Example 8 was conducted to compare the effects of the bacterial strain Pseudomonas cepacia AMMD with a control (NBY broth) on cyst germination. The procedure of Example 5 was used with respect to Example 8. The results of this experiment are illustrated below in Table 15.
TABLE 15
______________________________________
Treatment % Cyst Germination
______________________________________
broth alone 58.6
AMMD 22.6
______________________________________
EXAMPLE 9
Example 9 was designed to test the in vitro effects of Psuedomonas cepacia AMMD on Aphanomyces zoospores. The Pseudomonas cepacia AMMD bacterial strain was compared to three controls: (1) lake water; (2) cell-free filtrate from NBY-AMMD culture: and (3) NBY growth broth alone. All solutions were diluted to 1% of original in milli-Q water. The motility of the zoospores was rated according to the table illustrated in FIG. 5. Table 16 below illustrates the mean of 5 repetitions at 10 and 30 minutes from the following treatments:
Treatment 1--lake water control
Treatment 2--AMMD in NBY broth
Treatment 3--Cell-free filtrate from NBY-AMMD culture
Treatment 4--NBY broth alone
TABLE 16
______________________________________
Time Treatment: 1 2 3 4
______________________________________
10 min. 3.4 0 3.6 2.6
30 min. 3.8 0 3.4 2.8
______________________________________
As illustrated in Table 16, Pseudomonas cepacia AMMD in the NBY broth eliminates zoospore motility after 10 minutes. However, the NBY broth alone and the cell-free cultures of AMMD do not effect zoospore motility.
EXAMPLE 10Example 10 was conducted to test the effects of sugar beet seeds coated with certain bacterial strains on Aphanomyces cochlioides zoospores. Sugar beet seeds were coated with the bacterial strains and planted in a growth chamber under conditions similar to Example 1. The soils were inoculated 6 weeks later with 20 ml. of 103 zoospores per milliliter of Aphanomyces cochlioides. Approximately 6 weeks later, the plants were harvested and the shoots dried and weighed. The results of the shoot dry weight are illustrated below in Table 17.
TABLE 17
______________________________________
Treatment Shoot Dry Wt. (mg).sup.1
______________________________________
Control 5330
BC 4804
5A 5716
AMMD 9199*
AM 11533*
AMMA 11742*
______________________________________
.sup.1 Values are means of 15 replicates per treatment. Values marked wit
an asterisk are significantly different than the controls (Dunnett's test
p = 0.05).
The bacterial strains Pseudomonas cepacia AMMA, AM, and AMMD significantly increased sugar beet shoot dry weight compared to the control treatment without bacteria.
EXAMPLE 11Example 11 was conducted to compare the effects of various bacterial strains with or without the addition of captan on the emergence of pea shoots. The tests were conducted in soil naturally infested with Aphanomyces euteiches. Pea seeds were coated with the bacteria using the same procedure as for Example 1. In one experiment, treated seeds were planted into flats of soil in the greenhouse. The next experiment was conducted in the field using only three of the bacteria. In both cases, seeds without bacteria served as the check treatments. The results of Example 11 are shown below in Table 18.
TABLE 18
__________________________________________________________________________
Effects of Bacteria On Pea Emergence.
% Emergence
Bacterial Treatment:
None
5A PRA25
AMMA AM CRK419
AMMD
__________________________________________________________________________
Greenhouse Experiment
with captan 84 e
79 e
88 de
92 e 85 e
81 e 62 c
without captan
13 a
29 ab
63 cd
61 c 31 b
25 ab
--
Field Experiment
with captan 88 d 92 d 88 d 89 d
without captan
40 a 56 b 56 b 72 c
__________________________________________________________________________
Treatments within each experiment that are not followed by the same letter are significantly different at the P=0.05 level using the Least Significant Difference test.
As illustrated in Table 18, the bacteria strain Pseudomonas cepacia AMMA and Pseudomonas fluorescens PRA25 significantly improved pea emergence from seeds not treated with captan in the greenhouse experiment. Comparing seeds without captan in the field experiment, Pseudomonas cepacia AMMD and Pseudomonas fluorescens PRA25 significantly increased the emergence of peas compared to those without bacteria. None of the bacteria tested improved the emergence of peas treated with captan.
EXAMPLE 12This example was conducted to examine the effects of strains PRA25 and AMMD on pre-emergence damping off caused by the fungal pathogen Pythium. Four soils naturally invested with Pythium species were used for this greenhouse experiment. Each replicate consisted of 25 pea plants planted in each of four sorts. Pea seeds without captan were coated with PRA25 or AMMD as previously described and planted in flats containing infested soil. Untreated seeds without bacteria or captan, and seeds treated with captan were used as controls. There were three replicates per treatment, and the protocol was repeated three times. Percentage of pea seedling emergence was determined eight days after planting. The results of these experiments are summarized in the following Table 19.
TABLE 19
______________________________________
Pea Seedling Emergence in Pythium-infested soils
Seed Treatment
Rochelle Arlington Hancock Muck
______________________________________
Untreated 46.7 32.0 45.7 49.7
PRA25 72.0 51.5 81.3 42.7
AMMD 91.5 89.8 92.9 63.5
Captan 95.5 95.1 97.3 77.8
______________________________________
EXAMPLE 13
This example was a test of the effectiveness of these bacterial inoculants derived from pea fields on Pythium ultimum disease in cucumber. Cucumber seeds variety "Straight Edge" were planted into potted soils invested with the pathogenic Pythium and were inoculated with an overnight liquid culture of the strains tested. Cucumber seeds were treated with the commercial standard fungicide "Apron" or with a standard root clonizing bacteria, designated "standard" for controls. In addiiton untreated seeds were planted both in infected and uninfected soils as controls. Emergence and post-emergence damping off are expressed as percentages in the following Tables 20 and 21. Stand represents a percentage of total plants surviving of those planted and vigor was calculated on the mean distance to first leaf compared to the control.
TABLE 20
______________________________________
Treatment
% Emergence % Damping-Off
% Stand
______________________________________
Test 1
Uninoculated
80 0 80
Inoculated
68 35 44
Apron 96 0 96
Standard 90 16 78
5A 90 13 80
AM 72 21 58
AMMA 92 18 78
AMMD 94 28 70
CRK419 64 43 40
PRA25 88 16 80
Test 2
Uninoculated
92 0 92
Inoculated
70 38 46
Apron 98 0 98
Standard 98 0 98
5A 89 13 76
AM 82 2 80
AMMA 96 9 88
AMMD 78 8 72
CRK419 72 12 62
PRA25 98 0 98
______________________________________
TABLE 21
______________________________________
% % % %
Treatment
Emergence Damping-Off
Stand Vigor
______________________________________
Uninoculated
100 0 100 100
Inoculated
74 15 66 72
Apron 100 0 100 104
Standard 100 0 100 83
AMMA 98 3 95 92
AMMD 96 0 96 95
PRA25 96 2 94 106
______________________________________
It is understood that the invention is not confined to the particular construction and arrangement herein illustrated and described, but embraces such modified forms thereof as come within the scope of the following claims:
Claims
1. A process for controlling Aphanomyces fungal diseases of plants comprising inoculating the plants with an Aphanomyces disease-controlling effective amount of an essentially biologically pure culture of a bacterial strain selected from the group consisting of Pseudomonas cepacia AMMA (ATCC Accession No. 52796), Pseudomonas cepacia AMMD (ATCC Accession No. 53795) and mixtures thereof.
2. The process of claim 1 wherein the plants are pea plants.
3. The process of claim 1 wherein the Pseudomonas cepacia is diluted in a carrier to no less than effective concentration.
4. A process for controlling Aphanomyces fungal diseases of plants comprising inoculating the plants with an Aphanomyces disease-controlling effective amount of an essentially biologically pure culture of Pseudomonas fluorescens PRA25 of the strain Accession No. 53794.
5. The process of claim 4 wherein the plants are pea plants.
6. The process of claim 4 wherein the Pseudomonas fluorescens is diluted in a carrier to no less than effective concentration.
7. A process for increasing germination, decreasing mortality and increasing yield of a pea plant comprising inoculating the pea plant with a growth promotional effective amount of an essentially biologically pure culture of a bacterial strain selected from the group consisting of Pseudomonas cepacia AMMA (ATCC Accession No. 53796), Pseudomonas cepacia AMMD (ATCC Accession No. 53795), Pseudomonas fluorescens PRA25 (ATCC Accession No. 53794), and combinations thereof.
8. The process of claim 7 wherein the culture is diluted in a carrier to no less than effective concentration.
9. An agriculturally useful composition comprising a peak seed inoculated with an inoculant of a culture of a Pseudomonas cepacia strain selected from the group consisting of AMMA (ATCC Accession No. 53796) and AMMD (ATCC Accession No. 53795).
10. The composition of claim 9 wherein the Pseudomonas cepacia inoculant is diluted in a carrier to no less than effective concentration.
11. An agriculturally useful composition comprising a pea seed inoculated with an inoculant of Pseudomonas fluorescens PRA25 (ATCC Accession No. 53794).
12. The composition of claim 11 wherein the Pseudomonas fluorescens inoculant is diluted in a carrier to no less than effective concentration.
13. A biologically pure culture of Pseudomonas cepacia AMMA (ATCC Accession No. 53796).
14. A biologically pure culture of Pseudomonas cepacia AMMD (ATCC Accession No. 53795).
15. A biologically pure culture of Pseudomonas fluorescens PRA25 (ATCC Accession No. 53794).
16. A biologically pure culture of Corynebacterium flaccufaciens 5A (ATCC Accession No. 53934.
17. A biologically pure culture of Bacillus strain AM (ATCC Accession No. 53933).
18. A biologically pure culture of Bacillus strain CRK419 (ATCC Accession No. 53935).
19. A biological inoculant for plants comprising an essentially biologically pure culture of bacteria selected from the group consisting of Pseudomonas cepacia AMMA (ATCC Accession No. 53796), Pseudomonas cepacia AMMD (ATCC Accession No. 53795), Pseudomonas Fluorescens PRA25 (ATCC Accession No. 53794), Corynebacterium flaccumfacients 5A (ATCC Accession No. 53934), Bacillus strain AM (ATCC Accession No. 53933), Bacillus strain CRK419 (ATCC Accession No. 53935), and combinations thereof.
| 1172585 | August 1984 | CAX |
| 59-062509 | April 1987 | JPX |
- Parke, J. L., "Biological Control of Aphanomyces euteiches F. sp. pisi by Bacteria Applied to Pea Seeds," Phytopathology (1987) 77:1688 (Abst.). Parke, J. L., et al., "Biological Control of Aphanomyces Root Rot of Peas," Poster presentation at the National Pea Improvement Association Meetings, Oct. 25-26, 1987. Parke, J. L., "Biological and Cultural Control of Aphanomyces Root Rot of Peas," Oral presentation Feb. 16, 1988 and published abstract in Wisconsin Food Processors Association Proceedings, p. 89. Levi, C., "Scientists Discover Biological Solution to Root Rot," CALS Quarterly, Summer/Fall 1987. "Wisconsin Soil Bacteria Test Successful Against Root Rot," Agrichemical Age, p. 25A (Oct, 1987). Cavaileer, T. D. and J. L. Peterson, "Effects of Various Biological Control Agents on Wilt and Growth of Field Grown China Aster," Biological and Cultural Tests (1988) 3:80. Cavaileer, T. D. and J. L. Peterson, "Effects of Biological Control Agents on Wilt Severity in Greenhouse-Grown China Aster," Biological and Cultural Tests (1988) 3:79. Fantino, M. G. and C. Bazzi, "Azione Antagonista di Pseudomonas cepacia Verso Fusarium oxysporum F. sp. Cepae," Informator Fitopatologico (Apr. 1982), 32:55-58. Kawamoto, S. O. and J. W. Lorbeer, "Protection of Onion Seedlings from Fusarium oxysporum F. Sp. Cepae by Seed and Soil Infestation with Pseudomonas cepacia, " Plant Disease Reporter, (Mar. 1976) 60:189-191. Knudsen, G. R. and H. W. Spurr, Jr., "Field Persistence and Efficacy of Five Bacterial Preparations for Control of Peanut Leaf Spot," Plant Disease, (May 1987) 71:442-444. Spurr, Harvey W., Jr. and Myron Sasser, "Distribution of Pseudomonas cepacia, a Broad Spectrum Antagonist to Plant Pathogens in North Carolina," Phytopathology, 72:710 (Abstr.). Baker, K. F. and Cook, R. J., "Role of the Pathogen in Biological Control," in Biological Control of Plant Pathogens, pp. 160-161, The American Phytopathological Society (1982). Lee, W. H. et al., "Studies on the Seed Bacterization of Sugar Beets 1. Comparative Studies on the Rhizoplane Microfloras of Sugar Beets Grown in Different Soils," Annals of the Phytopathological Society of Japan, 14(4):409-415 (1985) (Abstr.). Gagne, S., et al., "Inhibition de Champignons Phytopathogenes par des Bacteries Isolees du Sol et de la Rhizosphere de Ligumineuses," Canadian Journal of Microbology 31(9):856-860 (1985) (Abstr.). Cho, E. K., "Strategies for Biological Control of Soil-Borne Diseases in Economic Crops in Korea," Korean Journal of Plant Pathology 3(4):313-317 (1987) (Abstr.).
Type: Grant
Filed: Dec 10, 1992
Date of Patent: Sep 14, 1993
Assignee: Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation (Madison, WI)
Inventor: Jennifer L. Parke (Madison, WI)
Primary Examiner: Michael G. Wityshyn
Assistant Examiner: Choon Koh
Law Firm: Quarles & Brady
Application Number: 7/989,931
International Classification: C12N 120; A61K 3566;
